Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpha Gamma Kappa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alpha Gamma Kappa

Alpha Gamma Kappa (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Seems to be just WP:OR and I can't find any external sources backing up any of the content other than the fraternity appears to exist and be connected with podiatry. Contested prod LostOldPassword (talk) 20:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Reluctant delete. Surprised that I couldn't find any references to meet WP:ORG for a fraternity founded in 1939 and with multiple chapters, but I couldn't, at least in a brief search. Chuck (talk) 20:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Stay of Execution – I would hate to see this one deleted. It seems that a lot time and work went into the piece. However, like the nominator stated, I can find information regarding the existence of the fraternity. But can not find any specific information, to reference, concerning the claims made in the article. This fraternity is more closed lip than the Skull and Bones society. To the closing administrator, if the consensus is to delete, please send to my subpage. I’ll hold on to it and do some research the old fashion way, walk to the library :-) and see if I can verify the information. Thanks ShoesssS Talk 21:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fails WP:ORG, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:N and may be WP:OR. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per Vegaswikian. 152.2.133.109 (talk) 14:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete leaning towards Meh. I would have to agree with Chuck Carroll's sentiments, but I also have to note that there are almost no reliable sources about this subject. J.delanoy gabs analyze 14:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.